A cause that deserves some play

This is the top of the CNN.com home page today. As you can see, there is a picture of unemployed people (mostly mid-career white guys) standing in line to apply for jobs. Next to that picture and story is a photo and article about the growing protests against Wall Street, our gridlocked government and a variety of other social and economic issues.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I support any movement that is going to shine some light on the gross unfairness of what has become a corrupted, rigged-for-the-rich system -- a system that has led to catastrophic unemployment rate and the loss of the American Dream. I also support the media coverage.

While the Tea Party on the far right seems to focus only on one or two issues -- abolishing taxes and supporting gun ownership -- these protesters on the left have a broader sense of what has really caused the collapse of America and what it will take to restore hope. And it isn't more guns or less government intervention.

I applaud this coverage and high-visibility display by CNN and hope other media outlets will give these current movements as much publicity as they gave to the Tea Party and protesters abroad.

Along with the 99 percent finally waking up, maybe the mainstream media has also awakened to the fact that they don't have to go overseas to cover chronic injustices. Perhaps the media will put a little less time into covering one American girl's battle to beat a murder rap in Italy and place more prominence on what is becoming massive movement that addresses issues that impact virtually every citizen of this country.

As prudent news judgment and smart story selection continue to slide, the media has been late on a lot of important and relevant stories in the last decade. Underplaying and overplaying stories is an epidemic in more and more newsrooms and is a factor in creating fertile ground for abuse of power to grow in government and society in general. Missing the boat on the unemployment crisis is quite ironic for an industry that has been as hard hit as any in terms of job loss. I often wonder if a more responsible, competent news media could have prevented a lot of economic pain, not to mention two wars, if it had concentrated more on watchdog journalism instead of pouring limited resources into what is essentially fluff.

Perhaps if editors, news directors, writers and photographers would return to covering news that matters most to our way of life -- to our very existence as a nation -- they would not only help inform an apathetic or often misinformed public, but they would help themselves in restoring the once-positive image of journalism.

Damage done by Irene coverage

Media hype was at a fever pitch last week. It would be easy to blame an uncooperative Hurricane Irene or the forecasters who misread the storm, but once again the fault lies within the newsrooms and corporate offices of America, particularly on the East Coast -- the center of the universe for big media.

While the storm certainly created some nasty weather and flooding, it didn't warrant the closing down of New York City more than 24 hours ahead of the first drop of rain. Imagine the damage that did to the local economy.

By the time the storm reached Washington, it was barely a Category 1. Damage where I live, about 20 miles west of D.C. and over 100 miles away from the Atlantic Ocean, was practically non-existent. Didn't even need to reset a single blinking clock in my house. I know others are suffering without power, but with the way the media was warning us, you would have thought the entire electrical grid was going to collapse.

While I can forgive forecasters for erring on the side of caution, I am not so understanding of media outlets that produced around-the-clock coverage of a storm that was clearly, even to a layman's eyes, no Katrina in strength or in the angle of approach. It lost steam as it traveled up the coast, partially over land that zapped its energy long before it hit NYC.

Politicians were falling all over each other to appear like they were the most-concerned public officials, offering tough-love warnings into any TV camera they could find. But in this case, was all that tough love genuine, or were they using the storm to gain much-needed points in this increasingly combative political environment?

I was particularly bothered by the panic in New York. When I was growing up in and around the Big Apple, New Yorkers prided themselves on being tough and not reacting to every storm like it was the end of the world. Yes, unlike people in Washington, we went to school or work when it snowed. We knew how to drive in the rain and didn't freak out whenever storm clouds gathered. We didn't cancel Woodstock because it rained for three days. We laughed at the rest of the country that seemed soft.

But this is a different time, even for New Yorkers. This is an era of media hype that is driven by news organizations' struggle to survive. This is an era where politicians are desperate for more favorable poll numbers and where lawyers are lined up to sue any state or municipality that appears negligent in preparing citizens for an attack by Mother Nature.

I have written about media hype several times in this blog. I believe the lack of seasoned journalists in newsrooms is contributing to the loss of perspective in how the news of the day is played. Ultimately, this will hurt readership or viewership, but the empty suits don't see it that way right now. They pretend to be long-range thinkers, but their vision is often clouded by falling profits. The corporate types that run big media are not making news decisions based on anything other than money. Many of them have never worked in a newsroom in their lives. They often come from the business side or advertising ranks of TV or print journalism. That was all fine and well when newspapers and evening news broadcasts had big profit margins and the suits didn't interfere in editorial operations.

Then came the recession.

When I was a young reporter and editor, I always had to make a strong case to get a story on the front page. Inevitably, there was a veteran news and/or managing editor who acted as gatekeepers. Truly big stories with proper attribution, facts and significance to the general public went out front, lesser stories went inside. It was the editor's call, not mine, not the circulation director's or even the publisher's. Period. Regardless of my whining, it was their choice where my story was played, and I respected that and learned a great deal about news judgment from their decision-making process. We didn't ignore less important stories. We just didn't waste a lot of time or prominent newsprint on them.

We didn't panic the public just to sell newspapers, and we certainly didn't buy into what politicians or so-called "experts" were telling us if it couldn't be backed up with relevant facts that checked out. But the gatekeepers are mostly gone now -- retired, laid off or dead -- and the rules of the game have changed. Now it's all about quantity versus quality. More news delivered faster trumps a objectivity and accuracy in the minds of the business leaders running news organizations.

The age of tabloid journalism and 24-hour news channels changed the profession even before the recession hit. Everything became "breaking news" even if it wasn't fresh or particularly significant. Now, with the web, it's all about speed and flash, which is why typos are so abundant online.

A Category 1 hurricane isn't anything to take lightly, particularly if you are in the path of it, but it isn't worthy of the coverage Irene received. Ditto on the East Coast earthquake last week. If the media continues to hype these kinds of stories, one has to wonder what news coverage will look like if we experience a real catastrophe.

As the media chases the low-hanging fruit and eye candy (I can't look at another TV reporter standing in the rain with a microphone or a toppled gas station canopy), more significant stories and investigative pieces are being overlooked. Budget cutbacks and layoffs have gutted newsrooms and practically done away with watchdog journalism. The checks and balances that existed in most newsrooms are pretty much gone. The game is now to bombard viewers and readers with trivial information, air the same video footage over and over, and dial up a fancy Flash graphic or two in order to drive web traffic.

This is what for-profit journalism has become during bad economic times. This is, in part, the reason we got the non-stop garbage coverage of a relatively weak hurricane. It wasn't just that the media hyped the coverage, it also gave us nonsensical tips about how to pass the time if the power goes out in our homes or what to do if a tree falls on our cars. It was just ridiculous fluff. But it probably kept people tuned in.

As reporters stand outside in the middle of a storm preaching to us how dangerous it would be not to listen to their warnings (does something seem odd about that that you?) they are not digging through documents in city hall or chasing down tips about corruption in government. While they show close-ups of some fallen bricks after a minor earthquake, they neglect to do the type of journalism that can improve society.

I came out of the post-Watergate era, when people went into journalism in order to make a positive difference, expose injustice and inform the public in a manner that wasn't influenced by dollars. Heck, just talking to someone from our own advertising department was taboo back in the day. The newsroom was separate from all revenue departments for a reason.

I wasn't interested in sensationalizing rain. I was more driven to expose the truth about corruption on the board of education. I wanted to shine a light on problems like homelessness and animal abuse. I sought out the underdogs in society and tried to bring their stories to the front page. I tried to entertain people with columns, features and sports stories. For me, it wasn't about what the executive offices wanted. It was about what I thought our readership wanted or needed to know. If I and everyone else in the newsroom did our jobs, circulation would increase. But that wasn't our primary goal or only focus.

So what I am seeing now in the mainstream media sickens me because I know that without the mass media fighting the good fight, it will be much easier for crooks to hide and for an already apathetic public to stick its head into the sand even deeper. The media resources spent on the quake and Irene last week did not serve journalism or the public very well. Perhaps TV ratings and news website traffic spiked, but what was really accomplished other than creating hysteria at the grocery stores and panic from ailing seniors in New York being transferred from hospitals in preparation for storm surge that never came. In fact, as the media continues to cry wolf in order to boost profits, I wonder if the public will become dangerously skeptical about future storms with much more merit than Irene.

Back in the saddle with a new twist

It should appear obvious by now that Calvacca Blog has been somewhat revived in recent weeks. What is not so obvious is that I am back in the saddle again in terms of having a "regular job" -- a place where I go each day to work, learn and share.

The the details of the job that I started this week aren't as important as the fact that I have ventured outside of the mainstream media for the first time in my three-decade career. I am working in the communications department at a quasi-governmental organization in Northern Virginia. Many of my journalism skills are expected to transfer well as I get deeper into the job, which is not to say that there isn't a whole lot of new stuff that I need to learn in the meantime. I am grateful for the opportunity and welcome the challenge.

While I have sometimes questioned the usefulness of former journalists starting blogs -- it's almost a cliche, particularly since the start of the recession/layoffs in 2008 -- I can report that blogging (and all that goes with it) appears to have been a worthwhile endeavor that helped me land my current position, which required online and writing skills, in addition to a journalistic and design background. In fact, this was the second regular job that I was offered in recent weeks with similar responsibilities and technical requirements. Both hiring managers came from the newspaper world and seemed to have an appreciation for the time that I spent at USA Today and other papers. Neither employer made age an issue, which was a nice change from what appears to be the new norm at many other companies.

While the job market remains pretty tough, particularly for former newspaper professionals with ink in their blood, there does seem to be some glimmer of hope for folks who are able and willing to make a few sacrifices and to learn some new tricks. But be prepared. One's prior credentials or pay grade don't always carry the same weight in a new field. In some ways, you have to embrace starting over. Depending on your financial obligations, that isn't always easy to do.

The vibe of a newsroom is a fairly unique thing. It grows on you. It's hard to duplicate in other businesses. Back in the day, if you were patient and did your job well, you could eventually make a decent living on an editor's salary at a large publication. Those days are just about gone, as journalists with big paychecks are being shown the door at an alarming rate. But there does appear to be life outside of the newsroom, and with any luck, it will be an acceptable life -- one that doesn't involve the constant threat of layoffs that has poisoned the newspaper business and cut tens of thousands of careers short.

Note: I expect my blogging to be light for the next few months. However, I do want to continue to have a presence here, so please feel free to check out the blog from time to time.

A pause for a blog update

This is month 12 of Calvacca Blog. When I started the blog, it was something to do -- a way to pass time in between playing guitar, searching for work and taking walks to clear my mind. A way to stay connected to the news and maintain whatever writing skills that I might possess. I have learned some technical skills like how to embed video into posts and adjust the HTML coding to make them fit, created links and utilized counters that track the number of visitors to the website. I know the identity of most of my core readers. They are family and friends. Some, however, remain anonymous but are fairly loyal followers. Others just take a peek now and then or are one-time visitors who did a Google search on some particular topic that I happened to have written about. I don't know how many people from foreign countries have come to this blog, but I am guessing it's at least three dozen. My numbers are small compared with the big-time blogs, but drawing a huge audience has never been my intent.

I have hammered away on topics that are important to me. The unemployment situation hits particularly close to home, not just because of my own situation, but because of others in my life who are either out of work or afraid they are going to lose their jobs. I realize joblessness doesn't always make for compelling reading. In fact, I am almost certain people avoid this blog like the plague because they don't want to be reminded of certain realities in my life or in the economy as a whole that might eventually impact their lives. I don't curse. I don't write about celebrity nonsense or show sensational photos. Therefore, the odds of this blog ever going viral are pretty much zilch.

There are very few warm and fuzzy tales or literary moments of note on this blog. While some bloggers focus on one subject, I've tried to remain open to writing about various issues that come up in the news or in my own life. I have tried to write these commentaries in a straight-forward, narrative style.

Besides it being somewhat educational and helping to pass the time on some lonely days, blogging hasn't been all that I expected it to be. With that said, I am not certain what expectations I had 12 months ago. With millions of bloggers across the world, one isn't likely to be discovered here without a lot of marketing. Advertising and sales aren't my thing. One blogger isn't going to change the world, although collectively there is some evidence that blogging matters in shifting opinions and policy. So in that way, I do feel that I am minimally contributing to society. Of course, that doesn't pay the bills.

For the most part, though, bloggers are voices in the night. Some are nut jobs. Others provide a lot of food for thought not seen in the mainstream media. Most struggle to build a following. A lot of bloggers are former journalists, like me, who lost their jobs in the recession and can't find their way back into a newsroom for whatever reason.

I am not sure where this blog is going as the one-year anniversary approaches. Lately, I feel that I have said everything I can say about the economy, the state of politics, the world in general and the condition of my old profession. Until things change, what else can I rant about or applaud?

The blog could use a lot more reader participation, but I have had to tighten filters on the comments because of the typical Internet stream of lunatics that want to leave inappropriate remarks. I don't use foul language or make threats on this site, but apparently those who comment don't have those same values. Seeing how ugly and limited people can be has been one of the negatives of blogging. Doesn't inspire much confidence in my fellow human beings. But that aside, blogging has been a mostly positive experience in a rather negative year. I have no regrets.

Hayward: A story more fit for page 3

No wonder newspaper circulation is hurting and television news ratings are declining. For the second week in a row, the media has latched onto a story that in the grand scheme of things is fairly meaningless to most Americans, particularly citizens who are struggling financially, have sons and daughters fighting in hopeless wars or simply had plans to vacation along the Gulf of Mexico this summer.

Media outlets are playing up the possibility of Tony Hayward, British Petroleum's CEO, stepping down. Last week we were up to our ears in the Shirley Sherrod nonsense (see previous post). I think a potential Hayward resignation is news, just not above-the-fold, page-one news on consecutive days. News companies have lost a lot of resources in the recession, so pouring time into stories like this is an even bigger waste of newsprint and airtime. The story impacts virtually no one other than the Hayward family. It's not like there is a shortage of other more significant news and topics that deserve reporting and objective analysis. Where has investigative journalism gone? The kind that altered lives and even the planet as a whole? Why are we so immersed in the tale of one filthy-rich guy whose job will be filled by another soulless suit with better public relations skills?

No one cares about Tony Hayward. No one I know, anyway. When super-wealthy guys get fired or are forced to resign, the public sympathy/interest rating reads about a minus five on a 1-to-10 scale. Look, we're happy to not see Hayward very often anymore. We are generally pleased not to see any CEOs on television or on the front pages of newspapers. Playing musical chairs at the top of these corporations is mostly a game of appearances with no ramifications for the public. It's insider stuff that really makes little difference in how the world spins.

I am tired of perceptions, celebrities and politics guiding everything from media coverage to government policies. It's all rather distracting at a time when we need laser-like focus. We should start uniting and educating in order to fix some very real and serious problems. The media can play a role in this if it can find a way to make the news relevant to people's lives.

Unlike the millions laid off in this recession, Hayward is going to be fine -- probably better than ever because that's the way the game is played at the top. BP is going to continue being BP. CEOs will come and go, and when they go, it's always with a golden parachute. The real task at hand for BP is not in replacing Hayward, it's in cleaning up the damn Gulf. The work of the government is to find out what went wrong in this catastrophe. Replacing Hayward is mere window dressing that the media should not get too distracted by while covering the bigger story.

The bigger story beyond Sherrod

A couple of folks have asked me what I think of the Shirley Sherrod situation. The former USDA employee was fired for making what seemed to be racist statements in an old speech captured on videotape. As it turned out, the comments appear to have been taken out of context and Sherrod has since received apologies from almost everyone involved in the rush-to-judgment, including President Obama. The USDA is even offering to rehire Sherrod.

A lot of things about this story don't surprise me, which is part of the reason why I haven't felt compelled to comment on it until now. Journalistic standards, which played a role in this debacle, have been declining for years and are currently hitting what I hope is rock bottom. Misinterpreting comments/data is one of the pitfalls of today's reporting. As the online rush and economic climate have created less experienced newsrooms, quality control has nosedived. The gatekeepers in many newsrooms have gone extinct. It is also obvious that certain media outlets have an agenda and have lost the ability to be objective and thorough, particularly when it concerns race and politics. I haven't heard any apologies from Fox News regarding how some of their commentators prematurely spun the condensed Sherrod video.

Beyond the media's role in fueling the fire in this case, there is another problem. It has become so common for employees to be unfairly fired or laid off that I am not sure what all the hoopla is about in the Sherrod incident, especially considering all the other important news that should take precedence over this story. To my way of thinking, the bigger story goes beyond Sherrod. The story should be about the American workplace and the relationships between employers and employees, covering the full spectrum of why and how so many people were laid off in the recession, why jobs aren't coming back and the trends that are eroding basic trust and productivity.

Employees have been fired and laid off for unjust reasons for a long time. Some can't even find work or get promoted for reasons such as race or age discrimination. Depending on where you work or want to work, you can either be too young, too old, too white or too black. The recession has led some companies to get rid of workers based on "last hired, first fired" or other seemingly random criteria or false perceptions. From all the media coverage over this one unfair workplace dismal, you would think the Sherrod firing is a new phenomenon.

So the Sherrod story in and of itself doesn't motivate me that much to watch 24-hour coverage of it on CNN, MSNBC or Fox. If it shines light on what should be obvious to everyone by now, then fine.

The only unusual aspect of the Sherrod case is that she was actually offered an apology and a new job. Most people who are let go from jobs because they were misunderstood, didn't smile enough, or simply spoke their minds too often aren't given apologies, let alone hired back. Sherrod will prosper from being victimized. She will land on her feet in better shape, which is more than can be said for others who have faced similar situations but received no media coverage.

Why I may never vote Republican again

It doesn't happen often in my mature years, but every once in awhile I want to punch some arrogant politician in the face -- if not literally, then figuratively.

Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay is the latest moron without a clue as to what he's talking about. Delay says people are unemployed because they want to be. Read about it here.

I would love to invite Mr. DeLay to my modest home and show him my Excel files on my computer with hundreds of jobs that I've applied to since being laid off from USA Today in December 2008. I would love to show him how little food is in my fridge, my lawnmower that won't start and my dishwasher that has been turned off for over a year because I can't afford to have it fixed. My thermostat is on 64. My socks have holes in them. And my pride has been blown to pieces.

I would love to show Mr. DeLay my credentials in order to make my case that for 29 years I was a responsible employee who earned his way up to larger companies, building an admirable career in journalism, learning new skills with each job, and embracing technology. I would enjoy telling him how I worked on my college newspaper and interned at the local television station while other people were partying, and how I am a third-generation journalist with ink in his blood, not a bum sitting on the corner drinking ripple wine.

If Mr. DeLay could produce a job in the area where I live, which paid even 60 percent of what I previously earned, I would take it. I would even consider relocating in order to work. But I doubt this Republican has any clue about the predicament I am in, the efforts I've made and the crushing disappointments I've experienced, nor cares. I am beginning to regret ever having voted Republican in my life. After the recent cold and uninformed comments about jobless people from DeLay, Pat Buchanan and Jim Bunning, I might never vote Republican again.

Wonder if Mr. DeLay knows what it feels like to interview for a job over the phone for 90 minutes and then never hear back from that potential employer? Wonder if Mr. DeLay realizes that I and millions like me spend 4-10 hours a day, seven days a week, looking for work, filling out sometimes complex online applications, networking and making cold calls?

If politicians like DeLay want to do something constructive, how about enforcing age-discrimination laws that are openly being broken by numerous companies. That might help improve the job-hunting chances of qualified folks 50 and older.

Right now, I am fighting against a recession, a dying industry (journalism) and blatant age discrimination. I apply to hundreds of jobs that I am 100 percent qualified for, Mr. DeLay, yet rarely get a reply, even though I usually state that I am not looking to exceed or even match my previous salary. Sadly, as my unemployment payments appear to have run out, I have to choose between selling my house this year so I can afford to accept a minimum-wage job or freelance work, or exhausting my remaining savings while I continue my search for a position that will enable me to maintain my modest lifestyle. This is reality and not as easy a choice as some people throwing stones seem to think it should be.

Mr. DeLay, does this sound like someone who doesn't want to work? Yeah, it's my personal story of the last 15 months, but it's also the story of many other people my age. I suggest you and other politicians who are prone to stereotyping unemployed people leave your gated communities and plush offices in Washington and start talking to guys like me -- guys who have busted their butts for decades, only to be treated like unwanted garbage by people like you. Many of us lost our jobs for less than honest or legitimate reasons. The layoffs of this recession were driven by some companies wanting to clear their payrolls of older workers. Now we're faced with criticism for not being able to find new jobs? Unbelievable.

Sen. Bunning was not "brave" in his recent attack on jobless Americans. That undignified attack wasn't about fiscal responsibility. You two are apparently cut from the same cloth -- talking in code, out of touch with realities of today. You are selling something to your conservative base, the ones who can't think for themselves, that is not honorable or true. Ironically, with your cold tactics and idiotic comments, you are doing more damage to your party than are the Democrats.

I am fiercely independent and weigh each issue on its on merits. I wish there was a political party that spent money wisely, but also protected the environment -- was pragmatic, yet compassionate. For whatever reason, it seems politicians can't support the protection of wolves yet also be tough on crime. I have never understood this. If it was up to Republicans, there would still be smoking in restaurants in Virginia, but we might not have the ridiculous car tax. Republicans want no regulations, but Democrats want to regulate everything. Where's the balance?

After these last several weeks, I doubt I will be supporting anymore Republicans for awhile. I live in a state where Republicans have turned down federal assistance for unemployed people. I've seen what a lack of regulations/funding leads to. And while I still believe Ronald Reagan was the perfect president for the time, I think we live in a very different era now. This recession is different than the last. The unemployment problem alone has taken on a unique form. We need less of Tom DeLay and Jim Bunning, and more politicians who can listen and not simply make ignorant assumptions.

Unreliable news: A recipe for collapse

Here's an interesting article about how downsized newsrooms and the outsourcing of reporting/editing can lead to inaccuracies, journalistic ethical problems and credibility issues in the stories we read or watch on television/online: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/18/business/media/18papers.html?hpw

Credibility is worth its weight in gold to most legitimate media companies. It's the lifeblood of newspapers like The New York Times. The public is well served by media that strive to get it right. So if the trend of errors and embarrassing mishaps continues, it could mean another financial setback for mainstream news organizations. An unreliable product is not a recipe for success. Without the professional newsroom gatekeepers, almost anything the public reads or views will be suspect and less attractive to customers.

Low-paying gigs hard to live on

There is little money to be made by low-end musicians. By low-end I mean the guy who plays piano in Nordstrom's department store or the dude strumming guitar on the schooner tour of some second-rate city's polluted harbor. There is even less cash to be made by musicians in small clubs who many times must guarantee a certain number of patrons otherwise they could actually lose money.

But "real" professions in offices don't seem to be any better these days. As jobs begin to trickle back, I am noticing pay is way down.

I saw a rather typical ad recently from an employer who wants to hire a journalist for a newspaper/web-site operation. The job required candidates to have a four-year degree, be experts in various software such as Photoshop, InDesign and Flash, be able to write sports and news stories, do page layout and manage a couple of part-timers. Weekends and night work was required. The ad said the salary was "competitive." When I checked to see what competitive meant, I found out it was $20,000 a year. And this isn't unusual, particularly in journalism. Makes you wonder why anyone would spend tens of thousands of dollars on a J-school education.

As employers have the upper hand in a bad job market, they are requiring a vast array of skills. This is not all that unusual in journalism jobs, but the salaries being offered are what folks could have expected 25 years ago with a degree and maybe a year or two of experience. The pay is so low that you might as well take that gig singing Van Morrison tunes at the tacky airport hotel lounge. Cubicle work certainly isn't that much more lucrative these days.

Of course, employers are like anyone else -- they tend to get what they pay for. Even though the market is flooded with fairly talented folks who would be willing to lower their salary demands, it's not always the best move to hire inexperienced folks or people with questionable work histories just to save a buck. That bargain-basement employee in the long run might not be such a good idea if your company ends up being sued for libel or some form of malpractice.

Online "news" intentionally misleading

I have touched on this before in this blog. And here is another example of what is wrong with the lack of real journalists working in online "news" environments.

A headline on AOL's home page today reads: "Is Tiger Woods Ready to Quit Golf?" The text below the headline says: "A report has surfaced that wife Elin has given him an ultimatum -- one that might not bode well for his career."

However, when you click on the story you find out that Woods quitting golf is just a rumor and a pretty far-fetched one at that, according to the writer. But in the online news world, the home-page headline and readout served its short-sighted purpose in that it got me to click to the full story, even if it did so by being blatantly misleading.

Unfortunately, AOL isn't the only site guilty of trickery disguised as real news. And just to be clear, I don't usually go to AOL, Yahoo or sites like that for news. However, I am beginning to see newspaper sites doing similar, unethical things in order to drive web traffic. And that's pretty disturbing to a lifelong editor such as myself. Ultimately, I think it will fail from a business standpoint.

My advice to these types of quasi-news web sites would be to hire professional journalists in order to increase credibility. People seeking legitimate news want to believe what they are reading. They don't want to read one thing on a home page and a completely different thing once they drill down into the site. Over the long haul, credibility is more important than tricking people to click headlines that are misleading. Solid, reliable and original content will build traffic, not juvenile gotcha headlines that refer to supermarket tabloid reports.

Update: Reports came out later in the day on numerous web sites stating that Tiger Woods is taking a temporary leave from golf. He's not quitting. I can't really understand why anyone would even speculate that he'd retire at a still relatively young age. Plenty of public figures, including athletes, entertainers and even politicians have been guilty of similar things that are alleged about Woods. Rarely does anyone ever quit over them unless they broke a law and are forced to. The money-making machine that is Tiger Woods will return to golf soon enough. Hopefully, the media won't glorify him quite as much when he gets back on the course. Athletes and others in powerful positions are often arrogant enough to think they can get away with anything and still maintain their public image. Yet few ever get through their various indiscretions without some exposure and scars ... just ask Bill Clinton, Wade Boggs, Gary Hart, Roger Clemens, Koby Bryant and a host of others.

Most adults still read newspapers

A new Scarborough Research study has found that 74% of adults (about 171 million) in the U.S. read a newspaper in print or online during the past week. The percentage is even higher among affluent folks. Yet, newspaper companies continue to struggle to find new revenue streams and are still shedding jobs.

The newspaper business seems to be one of the few industries that produces a product (credible information) that people want and routinely use, yet it still can't seem to financially right itself enough to satisfy boards of directors and nervous investors. Despite massive layoffs and other cost-cutting measures that have watered down content, profits remain flat because of the lack of advertising due to the recession. Circulation is down because of free news offered online, but circulation is not the main source of revenue for most papers.

However, one must keep in mind that newspapers historically have outperformed many other businesses in terms of profit margins. Journalists are generally paid a lot less than comparably educated folks. Most newspaper buildings are modest to say the least. Amenities and perks are few except at the largest media companies.

People go into journalism for various reasons, but money is generally not high up on the list. When a journalist loses his or her job, it's extra painful because it's unlikely that they have accumulated enough savings to ride out an extended storm. And we are in the mother of all storms right now.

What some papers are experiencing in this recession are margins more in line with other industries. The panic, which has included thousands of layoffs, does not seem to be as warranted as some might think.The companies carrying the most debt are the ones in the most trouble. Laid-off workers are paying the price for the mistakes made by people at higher pay grades. But some of the smaller chains are getting by because they did not overspend during the good times. Many newspapers, big and small, are still profitable. If you didn't follow the business closely, you might think newspapers were like certain automakers, losing millions every week. That simply is not the norm for most publishers. Some newspapers that were hurting the most have closed their doors. But most live on.

There is a necessary transition more than an extinction going on in newsrooms, but tell that to people, like myself, who lost their jobs after 20 or 30 years and are struggling to find new ones. I support that transition to digital-news gathering and high-tech delivery systems, but loathe the way some companies are going about it.

After the loss of so much institutional knowledge via layoffs, one has to wonder what condition the business will be in when the smoke clears. Will readers still be there if content becomes less credible? Will investigative reporting be deemed as too costly? Will journalism schools bother teaching the basic principals of fair reporting and artful photo editing, or will they just offer courses in how to design web sites and sell pop-up ads? Will journalists have some life experience and perspectives that enrich their stories, or will everyone over 50 be forced out of newsrooms? Will front pages become massive advertisements? As a side note, I always found it admirable that Google refuses to put a single ad on its home page. They see creative and marketing value in keeping the page pristine.

I am convinced that for news products to remain viable, the basics need to be taught in universities and on the job by seasoned journalists. Just as an astronomer needs to understand math, a web designer better receive some instruction on libel, story editing, headline writing and freedom of information laws. Those building blocks help form strong news products that distinguish themselves from supermarket tabloids and off-the-wall blogs. I fear some decision-makers are losing sight of that and are therefore their own worse enemies in terms of ruining newspapers.

Whether the news is in print or online, content is a valued product that takes a diversity of talented people to produce, design and sell. When I see organizations like The Associated Press laying off a 70-year-old photographer, as it recently did, I fear something other than a paycheck is being lost. Many newspapers try hard to acquire ethnic and racial diversity in their workforce, but seemingly do little protect older workers anymore. It wasn't always that way.

The Scarborough study proves there is still an appetite for news. Walk into almost any coffee shop or onto any commuter train and you will see people reading the paper. It's up to industry leaders not to wreck the business while trying to survive the recession. If traditional companies continue on the path of torching everything in sight in order to improve bottom lines, I believe media startups will spring up to satisfy the public's need for news -- online, on Kindles and iPhones, and yes, even in print to some degree.

Jilted journalist not going away quietly

George Gombossy was the consumer "watchdog" journalist for the Hartford Courant for many years. He was booted from the newspaper, like thousands of other editors, reporters and photographers in the last year or two, but he doesn't plan to take his severance. Instead, he's going to sue Connecticut's largest daily newspaper. Good luck, George.

I expect to see a lot more of this from other journalists,especially older ones, who are suspiciously dismissed late in their careers. In fact, there is a new web site call JiltedJournalists.com that is beginning to get some traction with stories like Mr. Gombossy's. http://www.jiltedjournalists.com/News.html

I am not one to sue. I think there are far too many rich lawyers as it is. But there are times when certain injustices must be countered. Unfortunately, we don't live in an age where corporations always do the right thing, particularly when it comes to older workers. I think that's true in many industries, not just the news media.

Every picture tells a story

I don't know a lot about this photograph. I found it on the Internet a few years ago.

I know that my grandfather, Anthony Calvacca, is the man pictured second from the right. He was the chief photographer of the New York Post, but is without his camera in this picture. I assume he's in the company of other newspaper folks and perhaps their spouses. Most everyone called him Tony.

Obviously, this group of people is on a boat or ferry, presumably somewhere around New York City. From the style of clothing and the apparent age of my grandfather, I am guessing this picture was taken in the late 50s or early 60s.

My grandfather, and later my father (a news cameraman for WNBC and WABC), were Big Apple-media guys, each with their own unique stories and colorful experiences.

My father, Michael Calvacca, was in Time magazine for getting in fight with another television station news crew during a union dispute. Another story for another day. He also came to the rescue of Mason Reese, while doing a story about the child actor. Reese evidently was being harassed on the street by a mean-spirited passerby. My father won an Emmy and was pretty highly regarded in New York City media circles. He was friends with on-camera personalities such as sportscaster Marv Albert. When he died, WABC aired a 90-second obit/dedication at the end of the evening newscast. That's a lot of air time to give to one of your own.

My grandfather was a newspaper guy in the grittiest, street-wise sense. His photographs often appeared on the front of the tabloid. He was fearless in making great images. He helped friends and relatives get into the business. It was an era when friends helped other deserving friends get a job.

I know a lot less about my grandfather's career, but I do remember that when he retired, Mayor Beame held a farewell dinner at City Hall for him. Not bad for a newspaper photographer without an education and who worked on a family farm in New Jersey early in his life.

My career in journalism has been a bit different. Less glamorous, among other things.

I entered the newspaper business about the time it was transitioning from sort of a blue-collar, rough-and-tumble industry, to a more corporate, college-educated profession. It was an adjustment for me because of what my first-hand view of what journalism was before the locker room mentality of newsrooms was cleaned up. During my time at newspapers, journalism became more corporate. Like in many other businesses, you got ahead by playing the game more than by what you knew or how hard you worked.

But there is one unfortunate thing I share with my father and grandfather. We all were laid off or forced to retire too early.

My father was laid off from WNBC after winning an Emmy. Television news reports were transitioning from film to video tape in the 70s. There was no longer a need for the artful cameramen who documented news stories in the field in a similar manner to the way classic movies were filmed. Any schmuck with a video camera could create images by simply pointing a camera at a burning building or any other news event. And they could do it for far less money than the film craftsmen. Of course, the creativity and quality of video tape couldn't compete with film. But film itself was far too expensive. Tape was a bargain. Plus, the bean counters calculated that the average TV newscast viewer probably didn't care about quality. Our culture was quickly moving to a fast-food mentality across the board. You saw it in music, movies and even the nightly newscasts.

Fast forward to 2009 and look at all the video on so-called news web sites. The quality and composition is horrible, yet everyone within the industry runs around patting themselves on the backs like they are all a bunch of Frederico Fellini proteges. There isn't anything artful or even journalistic about most amateur video streaming online.

So while the technology improves, the creative capabilities continue to get watered down. Maybe one day the art of visual journalism will return, but for now, we're stuck with "citizen journalists" with camera phones because someone in power has determined that that is what will make their web sites profitable. Those who once aspired to be National Geographic photographers probably should look into wedding photography gigs.

My grandfather was pushed into retirement, not because he couldn't make compelling pictures anymore, but because he was no longer the future. I don't recall how old he was at the end, but I sure know he didn't want to call it quits. I remember stories about the dishonorable tactics the new owners of the New York Post used to get rid of anyone over a certain age. Despite my grandfather's unbelievable work ethics and dedication, not to mention ability to make pictures that helped put the Post on top back in the day, he was sent packing.

I see my grandfather in this black and white picture, on top of the world, and rubbing elbows with New York City's movers and shakers. I don't know the exact context of the picture, but I do know what it feels like to have the respect of others in your field. I see respect in that photograph.

USA TODAY let me go at age 51. As I outlined in an August posting, the circumstances of my being laid off stunk and involved more than just age. I am in a fairly profound jam as a result of one or two trivial-minded people making irrational decisions at a time when it's not good to be without a job. I turn 52 later this month. I don't feel that old because I am still very much involved in everything from new technologies to blasting away on my Stratocaster guitar through my Marshall amplifier. But those are hobbies, not a career.

Predictions of employment continuing to climb are reported almost daily. The newspaper business is in trouble and other businesses aren't doing much better. I, like so many other Americans, am just fighting to survive one day at a time, hoping that someone will see the many benefits I could bring to their business.

When I say survive, I do literally mean survive.

My grandfather died a short time after he was forced into retirement. He once told me, with a certain resignation in his voice, that there is only so much golf he could play. In my case, there is only so much blogging I can do or rock bands I can form or join.

My father got cancer a couple years after his layoff and died in his 50s. His passion was golf, much like my grandfather's. It wasn't enough to keep him healthy during his period of unemployment.

You can imagine some of the thoughts that run through my mind as I try to get back into the workplace. But when I look at that photograph, I come to realize something else. Nothing lasts forever. Our time on this planet is very short. Our time on top of our careers is even shorter. The concept of fairness in the workplace is as obsolete as film in a news camera. There is no rule that says just because I went to college, had an outstanding track record during my career, that I can't end up living on the streets in five or 10 years.

Yes, 50something is too young to not be working. I have so much to offer now that I didn't when I was in my 20s or 30s. Seasoning, perspective, a mountain of skills and life experience to name a few. Assets that could help any company make money. Trying to convince employers of that is quite a challenge these days. When I was in my 20s and 30s, and didn't have much versatility, all I needed to do to find work was send out a few resumes. Boy, what an upside-down world.

I don't want to give up on journalism quite yet, even though some say I should. It's hard to walk away from something that has been in your blood. I don't like the trends I see in journalism, but rather than criticize them in a blog, I would prefer to be part of the solution in a job. Whether I get another shot or not remains as big a mystery as that photograph of my grandfather.

An old murder story with a new twist

Barbara Pelkey, a Wallingford, Conn., mom was brutally murdered in 1987 while working the late shift alone in a manufacturing plant in town. About two years later, a young man by the name of Kenneth Ireland Jr. was sentenced to 50 years for the murder of Mrs. Pelkey.

Last week, Ireland, now 39, was released from prison. Recently discovered DNA evidence proved that Ireland was not the murderer. Quite a shocking revelation.

The murder was big news in a small town. I won't get into the details, but the death of Pelkey was particularly gruesome. I know this because I was the bureau editor in Wallingford while working for the Meriden Record-Journal newspaper. I heard the stories about the crime scene from my reporters and from the local cops. There was a lot of pressure on the police to solve the crime. We published many stories about the homicide in the months of investigation that followed.

You can imagine my reaction a couple weeks ago when, out of the blue, a former reporter of mine, Ralph Tomaselli, e-mailed to inform me of what was going on with Ireland and the new DNA evidence all these years later. As a side note, Tomaselli is now executive editor of that same newspaper in Connecticut.

Not only was the freeing of Ireland an interesting new twist on an old story, it was also a reminder of the rewarding brand of journalism that we practiced in the bureau of the Record-Journal. The Pelkey murder wasn't the only big story we consistently scooped the competition on. The Hartford Courant, 30 miles to the north, was king of all media in Connecticut. Yet, we beat them to the punch on local breaking news and enterprise almost every time, and it paid dividends as our circulation in Wallingford increased.

We did our best to follow the Pelkey-Ireland story and there was little reason for us to believe that the police were off base on the arrest. But I still believe this underscores the importance of watchdog journalism.

The latest news on this case stirred my journalistic instincts. I found myself wanting to get back into a newsroom as soon as possible. A million questions ran through my mind about Ireland and what I would ask him if I could get an interview with him.

This bit of news that fell from the sky a couple weeks ago reminded me that local journalism will always be important to small-town America. People will read the news if the news is relevant and timely. They still want to know what is going on in their towns. The exploits of Britney Spears is of little concern to most folks who are community minded. No matter how much certain segments of society and even the fringe media want to dumb down the culture, people will always want to be informed through credible reporting via newsprint, computer screens, Kindles and whatever other devices are invented in the future.

Post-layoff world at 50something

OK, we've all heard the horror stories about the current job market. The evening news gives us the statistics. The human aspects of the unemployment struggle are seen in the personal relationships we have with those who have fallen victim to layoffs. We know many of the reasons for the layoffs, few of which have anything to do with wrongdoing or shortcomings on behalf of those who have been let go. The financial strains are very real. The self-esteem issues that arise can be jarring. I intuitively knew all of this before last year. Yet nothing prepared me for what was to come in a post-layoff world.

Last December, in the blink of an eye, my job as an editor at USA TODAY came to an end. Relationships that evolved over 13 years were suddenly terminated after a few parting words and expressions of sorrow. Out of sight, out of mind quickly took on new meaning for me. The details of my layoff are not important for this entry. Needless to say, I have some issues about the circumstances behind my dismissal. Regardless, last December was a dark day. Not the worst day in my life, but in the top 5. Not only because I lost a job for the first time in my 29-year career, but because I was being rejected in a place where I showed the most loyalty of my career and sacrificed so much to do a difficult job. Even with all of my editorial skills and experience, there was no place for me in a rather massive media company. I thought, how can that be? I have design, editing, writing, photography and management experience. There is virtually nothing in a newsroom that I haven't done. I've covered the Super Bowl as a photo editor and was a beat reporter for the Miami Dolphins. I wrote about crime and politics as a reporter in southern Virginia and Maryland. I redesigned newspapers and led entire newsrooms at community dailies. In doing all of this, I also lost some balance in the rest of my life - a mistake I won't repeat when I find a new job. It's healthier to not live to work and studies show employees are more productive when they are able to disconnect from work on weekends and other times off.

At USA TODAY, I essentially was the lone print graphics department manager. Others had left or been driven out (their words, not mine) in the previous year or so and were not replaced. I couldn't understand how I could be deemed as expendable when in fact I could have been easily transferred to another department or another property within the parent-company, Gannett Corp. My layoff seemed hyper-personal. I had no issues with Gannett or USA TODAY per se. I liked working there. Had good reviews. I took pride in the brand and rarely missed a day of work. I often worked until 1 a.m. or later. Yet, this still happened.

Closure has been difficult to find. At age 52, I am in a gray area. Too young to retire and apparently a little too old in the eyes of some to be given a chance to start over. I stayed where I did, at the "nation's newspaper" because I thought I had job security -- an important thing to have in a terrible economy. Loyalty, good work ethics and competency use to yield job stability. But the rules have changed. What I am finding out now is that by my staying with USA TODAY as long as I did, at that stage in my life, I actually hurt myself. Sort of got pigeon-holed. One or two publishers of smaller newspapers have recently said they are reluctant to hire folks from bigger organizations. Said those who have worked at the larger papers are, for lack of a better word, spoiled. All I could think of was how untrue that was in my case. I never took anything for granted at USA TODAY and rarely took advantage of the many perks offered by the flagship employer. My ethics were formed at the smaller papers I worked at early in my career. I never felt spoiled in any way.

The biggest challenge that is on my plate is in selling myself to a potential employer at my age and in this horrible recession. Yes, the recession continues despite what some politicians want you to believe. What I have accomplished professionally in the past doesn't seem to matter. In one way or another, I have applied for about 300 jobs in nine months. There is rarely a day that goes by that I am not networking or online searching for jobs in and outside of the journalism field.

Finding work is often a lot harder than actually having a paid job. The rewards are almost non-existent. The ego is under siege on a daily basis because many employers don't bother responding to job inquiries, regardless of one's credentials. Being ignored can make a person feel small. And the isolation can be daunting. Day-to-day survival becomes more important than long-term planning. Staying healthy and living in the moment take on greater importance. Each day starts off with optimism and often ends in tiresome anxieties.

I think there are many wrong perceptions about being 50something that aren't good for our society as a whole or as individuals. Fifty is NOT the new 40 except for in the movies or on Madison Avenue. Fifty is simply 50. If I were a baseball manager, I'd be marketable at this age. But I am a journalist. An "average Joe" in a once honorable profession where I learned from my elders. Journalism has taken a hard turn towards the young, the flashy the trendy. It's probably no coincidence that mainstream media continues to slip on the public credibility polls. But the young also bring ideas to the table and reject old models that no longer work. I respect that.

Regardless of how up to date one is, or how many blogs they write, it's still a tough stereotype to beat when age equals inability to stay current in the minds of some. Age discrimination is alive and well in America. And if that isn't all enough of a barrier, the newspaper industry is hurting in epic proportions. I believe some of the pain is self-inflicted through mega companies obtaining ridiculous amounts of debt and compounding the problem by making poor decisions on getting rid of so much institutional knowledge and diluting print products so that they are less desirable to readers. But there is also no doubt that readership patterns are changing and that the business model for publishing needs to evolve. More and more folks are talking about newspapers needing to become non-profits, which I think has some merit. A free society without newspapers in some form will not stay free for long. If big business can't keep newspapers viable, maybe it's time to take an entirely new approach, one that isn't driven by ad revenue or online page views. Probably would help journalism return to more substantive reporting in certain venues.

Trying to convince employers in other industries that being a lifelong journalist has in many ways prepared me for a variety of vocations is another tough nut to crack. These non-media employers don't easily see how journalism prepares one to write, research, edit, speak intelligently on a variety of topics or to be an effective advocate. They don't understand how we are trained to deal with deadlines and to embrace technology, and how those skills would be an asset in almost any business. Journalists are hard-working folks. We work nights, weekends and holidays and rub elbows with every segment of society. But I remain hopeful that someone will eventually be able to connect the dots, see the tangibles as well as intangibles that I can offer. There are many of us out here in unemployment land who could be hired at bargain basement prices and would be profoundly grateful to be employed again.

I have to hope that the smartest employers will eventually tap into the wealth of experience that is available. There is no other choice. Hope, of course, is everything, particularly when you're 50something and looking for a job.